Are Six Samurai decks obsolete or are they still okay?

I know with Smoke Sig, Gateway, and Shi-En all limited the deck got really hurt. But is it still playable? Can it still compete in a tournament well?

How much does the deck itself cost to make?

Any deck lists will be greatly appreciated. 10 points to best answer?

admin answers:

Six Samurai’s are still considered Tier 2 so they’re okay as long as you don’t go up against things like Inzekters, Wind-Ups, Agents, Dark World, etc.

Here’s my version of this deck and it’s been fairly consistent. My side deck varies from time to time so you can make up your own.

15 Monsters
2x Grandmaster of the Six Samurai
3x Legendary Six Samurai Kizan
2x Legendary Six Samurai Kageki
3x Kagemusha of the Six Samurai
1x Hand of the Six Samurai
2x Elder of the Six Samurai
1x Enishi, Shien’s Chancellor
1x Great Shogun Shien

Meaning of knave in a historical context?

I am an English learner and I am right now not sure if I should post this question in history or language. But I just looked up the word knave and in my language, it translates to „Knappe“ what’s a helper of a knight or sometimes even somebody who is learning the knight’s work by assisting an actual knight and also it translates to „Schurke“. „Schurke“ would mean as much as rogue.

So my question is basically, how did this happen? I can only imagine that it is somehow similar to the Japanese Ronin, who often became a plague to Japan after their masters died. Maybe after the war of the roses, too many knaves were left masterless and roamed the lands plundering or something like that?

Does anyone know how in history these two meanings developed?
Dammit John P., you’re right. I’ve never seen this before, but of course. Boy in German is Knabe und knave is Knappe. In old German, there weren’t many orthographic rules and the dialects tend to change the hard sounds, so Knappe became Knabe. It’s so obvious and I’ve never noticed… Shame on me

admin answers:

I’ve always heard that ‚knave‘ in English was just one of the many, many descriptors applied to lower-class laborers, like ‚cottar‘, ’serf‘, ‚villein‘, ‚clown‘, etc. I’d be willing to bet its etymology is as a mode of address for someone of that class, like the word ’sirrah‘, rather than a particular functional role.

Somebody learning to become a knight would have filled a role like ‚pageboy‘ (if quite young) or ’squire‘ (from the Latin for ’shield-bearer‘) if a teenager. These young men came from noble families and frequently were put out to be fostered (raised by) another knightly family that could provide training.

Landowning knights often brought servants along with them to tournaments or the battlefield, to care for their horses and armaments. These servants usually were young retainers from freeborn families (sometimes described as ‚yeomen‘) from lands the knight owned or nearby to them, though sometimes they might be higher-class peasants from the knight’s lands. This practice of peasants being recruited to personally serve a knight or lord was called ’sergeanty‘ in English. Initially these servants were not themselves expected to be fighters, though perhaps this sometimes happened. Over time, though, the label ’sergeant‘ came to be used to describe most foot soldiers serving as hired retainers in feudal armies.

Medieval Europe had nothing comparable to Japan’s ronin, except perhaps for mercenary companies that proliferated in the 1300s-1500s. Disattached knights and foot sergeants, and sometimes troops who deserted from their feudal army, could join or even start their own mercenary company.

Laura asks…

Do you think that seriously England has a chance to access the final ?

I think not because the French cock is going to eat the rose.

But we can drink some beers at the end of the match
@thatniceguy : do you want some salt and pepper to eat your pants ?

admin answers:

They may, they not, but what this tournament has shown us, is that the best team on the day will win………I think whoever wins on Sunday will be the cup winners!

John asks…

College Football Tournament Idea, would it work and who thinks it should happen?

Ok. Me and my dad were pretty mad that our Ohio State Buckeyes lost the big game, so we thought this up, so maybe a better team than them could make it, or just give them some games to play, so they dont have to spend 52 days doing nothing.

Either 32 or 64 teams in the Tournament. Theres 4 divisions, and the division title game will be either the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, or Orange Bowl. The winner of each bowl gets into the Final Four. The Tournament is set up just like College Basketballs March Madness tourney. It would last for 5-6 weeks, with games being played on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday of each week. Each Conference and Team would have to make its season start earlier, and end by Thanksgiving Weekend, so the Tournament would start the week after, go through December, and the National Championship would be when is now, early January. It wouldnt interfere with the NFL Playoffs either. Is our idea good or bad? do you see any possible problems/what would you add?

admin answers:

The idea is good as far as excitement yes. But is a completely ridiculous idea in the big picture. There is a multitude of reasons this would not work.

1-like they said, not enough teams in D-1 college football to house a tourney that big (over half the teams go to the tourney? No)

2-this would be WAY TOO BRUTAL on the players physically. There is a reason football teams play one game a week. Now you are suggesting that they play 2 games in one weekend? Absolutely would not work. By the end of the tournament you would have teams with half their players injured or in the hospital from exhaustion.

3-no one would endorse this because the teams outside of the top 25 cannot compete with the top teams, so the first 2 rounds would be absolutely pointless. Why give 50 teams a chance that have no chance of doing anything in the tourney?

I could go on and on. But trust me that the bowls have no significance in this argument except that the old timer football promoters are attached to them. The bowls used to be good before they had all the automatic placements. This last year there were about 2 good matchups outside of the BCS. The bowls are a joke. And the little bowl games do nothing financially for anybody! No one goes to them, so the venues/areas dont make anything due to them. A lot of teams lose money traveling to the smaller bowls because the payout to the school is too low. So anyone that said the bowls make too much money and the schools make too much money need to wake up. The bowl system is terrible! The bcs games make money and the schools in them make money, but outside of that, it is a joke.

They could still have the bowls just the way they are and then have the winners of the 4 BCS bowls play in a playoff after (the 5th bcs bowl is the national championship, so go back to just 4…and then have the playoff). If you dont win a major conference you dont deserve a shot at the title anyway. And these small schools such as boise state and utah that run the table normally make it as an at large bid. This is the way it will be setup if they ever institute a playoff. Which all fans are praying for

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

This entry was posted
on Dienstag, Juni 3rd, 2014 at 16:05 and is filed under Fragen.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.